Someone recently asked me:
“What’s something VCs really look for when they underwrite an investment?”
Could’ve said the usual suspects - founder–market fit, traction, TAM, cap-table hygiene etc... But I told him something I feel deeply about, and that isn’t talked about enough:
Time in market.
At the early stage, the question is - can the founder be “at it” for decades and still feel the same hunger? Hard to measure, but VCs can sense it.
At growth stage, it’s - how long have they stayed alive? And how have those years compounded trust, judgment, and founder–market fit that no blitzscaled rival can buy?
Founders who survive multiple cycles are real gold for VCs. Because cycles - especially down cycles - expose character.
What was prioritised? How were people let go? What do those people say now?
If a founder’s been through a near-death moment - ran out of cash, lost a key license, faced a regulatory shock - and turned it around, that’s not luck. Its resilience - an unfair advantage in venture.
In the end, honestly, VCs don't just underwrite traction. They also underwrite time, character, and the will to endure.
Because building through decades is about surviving long enough to deserve the 100x success.
And VCs want to be a part of empires and legacies.